Roger,
I'll try to answer your questions as best I can, though I'm certainly no authority. I became interested in genealogy long ago, but didn't become obsessed until about four years ago when my son sent me a 136 page Rogers genealogy he found on-line. It showed my mother's family to be descended from Aaron Fitzroger. That connection was seriously flawed, and now I won't believe it unless someone comes up with proof. Much of what is posted on the net is just impossible, just plain wrong, but is still a lot of fun. At the time I was considering changing my name (which I never did) liked the sound of Aaron Fitzroger, thought Erin would nice, and decided to try it out for a username. So that explains that.
About "In 7. Edward II...", I do believe that refers to the reign of Edward II, which was 1307-1327, and the "7", I'd guess, would be the 7th. year of that reign. I hope if someone else has another interpretation, they'll let us know.
Co. Devon would be the county of Devon. The British just put some things differently. A "prebendery" is a monk, priest, canon or other member of the clergy, in the Church of England, who is entitled to perform services in a cathedral or collegiate church. The Marian persecution" refers to Queen Mary Tudor,"Bloody Mary", who persecuted the people of the Protestant Reformation. Some 300 were executed, mostly ordinary protestants. The only nobility executed, I have read, were the priests, the first of whom was John Rogers. It is said that he showed the others how to die, which was very bravely. His story can be found in most encyclopedias, and there is a very florid account in Foxe's Book of Martyrs. Rogers, who graduated from Cambridge in 1526, was a Catholic priest sent to Antwerp to minister to the English maritime community there. He came under the influence of the protestant reformer William Tyndale, married a Belgian woman and had about 10 children. Was apparently never cut out to be celibate! So, when he went back to England he was in trouble. He would not renounce his wife or his convictions, some of which had to do with his disbelief in the transubstantiation (now there's a word to look up!) of the eucharist. That was the major sticking point upon which he was convicted of heresy. Anyway, he published, or prepared for publication, in 1537, of the first English language edition of the Bible, which got him in deeper trouble. It was nor, apparently, as contended by some, his own translation, but those of Tyndale and Miles Coverdale, with his own preface & marginal notes. It was called "Matthew's Bible", presumably for his pseudonym of Thomas Matthew, and was the work upon which the King James version was later based. He was also vicar of St. Sepulchre, and held some offices at both St. Bartholomew the Great and St. Paul's, where he preached against "pestilent Popery". All of this brought him to the attention of the opposition, he was ordered to cease and desist, wouldn't, so was imprisoned at Newgate prison for a year, and also held for a time, I believe, in the notorious "Clink" prison, from which we get our term "the clink" to describe a prison. He was tried by Bishop Bonner in the Lady Chapel of Southwark Cathedral, marched across London bridge back to Newgate, & next morning taken to Smithfield Market where he was burned alive, without being allowed to speak with his family or kiss them goodbye, on 4 Feb 1555. This is such a sad, tragic story, it never fails to bring tears to my eyes. I have visited Smithfield; across the street, on the outer wall of St. Bartholomew's Hospital, next to the church of that name, there is a plaque honoring him and the two others who were burned with him. I left flowers, purple iris and baby's breath. On the same wall is a similar memorial to William Wallace, "Braveheart", who was also executed at Smithfield, in a different time. There are always flowers there. All of these sites are in the same neighborhood, Smithfield, St. Sepulchre, St. Bartholomew, St. Paul's, and Newgate, now the "Old Bailey", easily accessible from either St. Paul's or Farrington tube station. Well worth a visit, if you're ever in London. Southwark Cathedral and the Clink are across the river, near London Bridge station. It is a nice sort of Rogers pilgrimage, to start at the Lady Chapel & walk across London Bridge to all the other sites. I did it in an easy day.
Are you ready for another essay? O.K., here goes. I should have put "Giles of Virginia" in parentheses, to make it clear that John Rogers was "the martyr", and his descendant was Giles Rogers. John Rogers was descended from many of the great medieval royal and noble houses of Europe, including the Plantagenets of England, (now there's an interesting genforum, if you have time to look,)and numerous dynasties of France, Spain, Germany, Russia, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Holland, Portugal, Switzerland, etc. But the ones I find most interesting are those of Italy and Sicily. Roger de Hauteville, (d. 1101) was one of "the 12 stalwart sons" of Tancred de Hauteville, a minor knight in Normandy, who didn't have enough land to provide for them all. About six of them went off to Italy to seek their fortunes. They included the notorious Robert, nicknamed "Guiscard", a word of many meanings, among them "the astute, crafty, cunning, wary, weasel and wizard". Probably more. He got his start in brigandage, "stealing sheep and cattle and holding people to ransom." The inscription on his tombstone referred to him as "TERROR MUNDI", the terror of the world. The boldest, cheekiest cut-throat Norman you'd ever want to meet. Absolutely courageous, ruthless, tall blond and gorgeous. Someone should make a movie of his life. He married the Lombard warrior princess Sichelgaita of Salerno, his equal in battle. "When dressed in full armour, she was a formidable sight"! He is also an ancestor of the Rogers. He conquered Naples and southern Italy, named himself Duke, & helped his little brother Roger de Hauteville conquer Sicily from the Moors. It has been said that "No member of the de Hauteville family ever laid eyes on another's land without wanting it for himself" The de Hutevilles were related to William the conqueror, and I have read that one of the inspirations for William's conquest of England was that he couldn't stand to see a poor, "base-born" cousin conquer a country for his own when William hadn't! .Roger became "Grand Count of Sicily", and his son, Roger II, d. 1154, became King of Sicily. Roger had many children, by a succession of wives, that figure in the overall story, but the one that concerns us is his son, Roger, Duke of Apulia, whose mother was supposedly Elvira of Castile, daughter of Alphonso, (maybe Alphonso the 6th, I can't remember, and don't have the facts before me). Elvira's mother was descended from Muhammad, the Prophet. This Roger, who would presumably have been heir to the throne, died in 1148, had no legitimate heirs, but had a "natural" son, Tancred of Lecce, by Emma, daughter or Count Achard of Lecce. Tancred became King of Sicily, (and that is a whole other most interesting story,) in 1190, died in 1194. His legitimate sons also died that same year, and had no children. (Another part of this tale.) These stories are best explained in the books by Sir John Julius Norwich, "The Other Conquest", and "The Kingdom in the Sun", which have been combined in a single volume, "The Normans in Sicily", available from Scholar's Bookshelf or Barnes and Noble, I believe, and I would highly recommend them to you. Now, about Aaron Fitzroger, whose descendants became Rogers some three generations later. There was Aaron Fitzroger born abt. 1280 in Italy, d. 1325/30 in London, son of Aaron Fitzroger, b. abt. 1260, in Italy, who fled that country, probably for his life, because of religious and political persecution. No spouses named, sad to say. This family was, I suspect, considered for generations to be "enemies of the papacy". He died aft. 1300 in London. His father was also Aaron Fitzroger, b.1249, in Rome, d. abt 1268. These dates don't quite compute, and you might find other dates elsewhere. This Aaron is supposedly a grandson of King Tancred. No one really knows for sure who his father was, I'm afraid, or if they do, they're not telling us, though you will see some speculation. My bet for paternity is Urso, the Bishop of Agrigento. I base this opinion solely on a passage in "The Norman Kingdom of Sicily' by Donald Matthew, Cambridge, p. 322, speaking of Agrigento,"Some witnesses...said that its bishop, Urso, had been expelled from the diocese three times: first by Henry VI for being the son of King Tancred;..." Henry would have been the one to know, and, under the circumstances, he was lucky he wasn't executed, but a bishop would not be a contender for the throne, which is probably the only reason he was allowed to live. However, if this bishop had a son in Rome, that son might have posed a political threat to the people in power, namely king and pope. Makes sense to me, and this is the only reference to a son of Tancred other than Roger and William, who died childless in 1194. That's my pet theory, for what it's worth.
I hope you find this rambling useful, and I welcome comment from all readers.
So, you're a library rat. The best kind. When I was in London for two months a few winters ago I spent so much time riding the underground trains I began to think of myself as a tube rat. Druther be one of the library variety.
My mother was a Rogers, too. Who was yours? I'll send you my data, such as it is, in atttachments, to your private email, if you wish.
Konnie